Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers
2004388 citationsRaymond Lister, Elizabeth Adams et al.ACM SIGCSE Bulletinprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Jan Erik Moström
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Jan Erik Moström's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Jan Erik Moström with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jan Erik Moström more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Jan Erik Moström
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jan Erik Moström. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Jan Erik Moström. The network helps show where Jan Erik Moström may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jan Erik Moström
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jan Erik Moström.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jan Erik Moström based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with Jan Erik Moström. Jan Erik Moström is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Zander, Carol, Anna Eckerdal, Robert McCartney, et al.. (2019). Copying Can Be Good. 450–456.3 indexed citations
2.
Zander, Carol, Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, et al.. (2012). Self-directed learning. 111–117.17 indexed citations
3.
Moström, Jan Erik. (2011). Students' experience of learning concurrency.1 indexed citations
4.
McCartney, Robert, Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, et al.. (2009). Liminal spaces and learning computing. European Journal of Engineering Education. 34(4). 383–391.18 indexed citations
5.
Moström, Jan Erik, Jonas Boustedt, Anna Eckerdal, et al.. (2009). Computer science student transformations. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 41(3). 181–185.3 indexed citations
McCartney, Robert, Jan Erik Moström, Kate Sanders, & Otto Seppälä. (2004). Questions, annotations and institutions: observations from a study of novice programmers. Aaltodoc (Aalto University). 11–19.10 indexed citations
18.
Lister, Raymond, Elizabeth Adams, Sue Fitzgerald, et al.. (2004). A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 36(4). 119–150.388 indexed citations breakdown →
19.
Moström, Jan Erik & David Carr. (1998). Teachers, teaching and computers. KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology).
20.
Moström, Jan Erik & David A. Carr. (1997). Programming paradigms and program comprehension by novices. KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology). 16.1 indexed citations
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.